Glory Recruit
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 13K,
Visits: 0
|
Say what you want about the fractured streaming market but it has done wonders for individual sports in this country. Rugby Union, Swimming, and now Australian football have/will been given tremendous exposure, promotion and access that wasn’t there before.
Future Sports rights are going to be very interesting.
|
|
|
|
paladisious
|
|
Group: Moderators
Posts: 39K,
Visits: 0
|
+xSay what you want about the fractured streaming market but it has done wonders for individual sports in this country. Rugby Union, Swimming, and now Australian football have/will been given tremendous exposure, promotion and access that wasn’t there before.
Future Sports rights are going to be very interesting. Definitely a change from the 20th century "three TV channels, two papers" market.
|
|
|
patjennings
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 6.7K,
Visits: 0
|
+xHas there been any mention of ACL? There was talk of an AFC wide deal (not in the Oz media) in the days following the APL deal
|
|
|
bluebird2
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 648,
Visits: 0
|
Having the Socceroos and Matildas on FTA will be a plus. I have seen excitement in my work place amongst non football fans when SBS started showing Socceroos games after the initial blackout from 2004 when pay got all the rights
This isnt huge because its 10. This is huge because internationals need to be given the same access as other sports. Having only 1 or 2 games on the anti syphoning list is shit and I cant tell you how much it upsets me the WWC will be on Optus despite being on our fucking shores
The points of interest of this are: . Still a lot of contra which is "being mentioned on project or master chef". No real cash and ambiguous value. Some people forget we have been on 10 before . The FFA had to buy the games from AFC (in past these were priced at $1m each) so that could be $6m to $10m a year in cash . The "face" value of the internationals ($100m for 3 years - if rights expire 2024) is greater than the entire A League at $200m for 5 years (this includes contra, broadcasting arrangements and other write offs). Dont expect interest in the Socceroos to translate to people watching WU v PG . The A League finally has the home it has been asking for, yet a mediocre AFL / NRL style uninspiring closed off league that not only ruins the image of the league, but also will damage the Socceroos as people who last watched them saw Cahill or even Kewell. This is like a woman waiting all year for her prom and then wearing a potato sack
This is nothing we havent had before and the game is still the same. With channel 10 announcing football will be number 1 like they did to the already popular cricket, expect our game to be a pawn in a dick measuring contest. If football doesnt have a plan to move past its current format with what it has been given, then this will be remembered in the same way as the channel 7 deal
|
|
|
df1982
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 861,
Visits: 0
|
Really astonishing that you've still managed to be negative about this deal, which is an unmitigated positive.
- Contra is advertising slots, and the game needs to be advertised to regain its popularity. Without the contra it would have to pay for this advertising, but now it gets it for free. That's good! We've been on 10 before, but they never advertised it because the broadcast was just outsourced from Foxtel (Foxtel paid for the slot, essentially). The Fox contract had a contra component, but advertising on Fox Sports is pretty worthless compared to FTA.
- No idea what the AFC rights cost, but it was very smart of the FA to buy them out and bundle them together. Ensures everything is on the same platform so there is cross-promotion between Socceroos and A-League, etc.
- As for the "mediocre AFL / NRL style uninspiring closed off league" – sure, but this deal gives the game the kind of financial security that will allow them to start up an NSD, expand the A-League and hopefully within the next few years align the football pyramid with pro-rel. Let's just hope they take the opportunity, but in any case it's way better than the slow death we were looking at a few months ago. We now have nearly $70m a year coming into the game from broadcasting, and dedicated commercial FTA live coverage of the A-League and internationals, with the guarantee of heavy promotion on the channel. It's the kind of deal we've been waiting 15 years for.
|
|
|
Burztur
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 9.1K,
Visits: 0
|
So has any bitters complained yet and said the deal isn't that big after factoring into inflation, contra or whatever?
Great news btw.
|
|
|
LFC.
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 13K,
Visits: 0
|
Whats to complain about gaining more money into the game and exposure, JJ had and quoted his intent for the game incl the NSD way back then. paulc the Lowy supporter has been quiet more than any the last weeks after all his banting of JJ/FA doing SFA since in control. I just hope NSD gets up and running with all the good news, will be the icing on the cakeas far as I'm concerned And funding more structure filtering down the channels.
Love Football
|
|
|
Footballking55
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 3.2K,
Visits: 0
|
CBS Sports have also signed a deal for coverage of all AFC matches into America, Champions League, WC matches internationals etc. CBS seems to be making a play for Football worldwide.
Next EPL and ECL rights will be very interesting. Maybe we'll have our cakes at last!
|
|
|
aok
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 2.1K,
Visits: 0
|
+xCBS Sports have also signed a deal for coverage of all AFC matches into America, Champions League, WC matches internationals etc. CBS seems to be making a play for Football worldwide. Next EPL and ECL rights will be very interesting. Maybe we'll have our cakes at last! Would be an amazing outcome if Paramount+ did become the home of all football (AL + EPL etc) in Aus. It will be interesting to see what impacts mainstream marketing will have on the sport. Fantastic day for Aus football, JJ has been a fantastic asset for FFA. Shame he was wasn't around earlier.
|
|
|
bluebird2
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 648,
Visits: 0
|
+xReally astonishing that you've still managed to be negative about this deal, which is an unmitigated positive. I'm not being negative, just realistic. I cant tell you how many times our game has been in this position starting with channel 7 at the end of the 90s If you guys want to be overly optimistic and celebratory, thats fine. But as this unfolds over the next few months I hope you guys are prepared for a realistic and detailed analysis. Not simply call it as a success regardless of what happens, as I have seen on this forum in the past
|
|
|
Burztur
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 9.1K,
Visits: 0
|
+xWhats to complain about gaining more money into the game and exposure, JJ had and quoted his intent for the game incl the NSD way back then. paulc the Lowy supporter has been quiet more than any the last weeks after all his banting of JJ/FA doing SFA since in control. I just hope NSD gets up and running with all the good news, will be the icing on the cakeas far as I'm concerned And funding more structure filtering down the channels. There isn't but I'm sure an excuse would pop up sooner or later. Agree that NSD would be a major challenge financially. I'm hoping someone like the ABC would step up and throw them some money to make it sustainable. What I like about things this time around is we are starting at a low base. In the past, we were riding off WC hype etc.
|
|
|
SUTHERLANDBEAR
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 3.3K,
Visits: 0
|
+xWhen are we able to sign up? The thought of kicking Kayo (Foxtel) to the curb is jackin’ me to the tits. * KERB * FFS !
|
|
|
Footballking55
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 3.2K,
Visits: 0
|
Robbie Slater indicated on the Fox broadcast that the A League will kick off in November. Hoping that is a two way step to move to a February 2023 winter competition the following year in alignment with the NSD and the pyramid. Fo 10 to get there wish, we must compete with the NRL and AFL. The hype over the WC in Nov 2022 and the WWC in 2023 will help in their marketing.
Interesting the above comment about getting the deal over the line without the hype of the WC. I suspect that 10 have looked over the horizon and like what they see.
|
|
|
crimsoncrusoe
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 6.9K,
Visits: 0
|
+xHaving the Socceroos and Matildas on FTA will be a plus. I have seen excitement in my work place amongst non football fans when SBS started showing Socceroos games after the initial blackout from 2004 when pay got all the rights This isnt huge because its 10. This is huge because internationals need to be given the same access as other sports. Having only 1 or 2 games on the anti syphoning list is shit and I cant tell you how much it upsets me the WWC will be on Optus despite being on our fucking shores The points of interest of this are: . Still a lot of contra which is "being mentioned on project or master chef". No real cash and ambiguous value. Some people forget we have been on 10 before . The FFA had to buy the games from AFC (in past these were priced at $1m each) so that could be $6m to $10m a year in cash . The "face" value of the internationals ($100m for 3 years - if rights expire 2024) is greater than the entire A League at $200m for 5 years (this includes contra, broadcasting arrangements and other write offs). Dont expect interest in the Socceroos to translate to people watching WU v PG . The A League finally has the home it has been asking for, yet a mediocre AFL / NRL style uninspiring closed off league that not only ruins the image of the league, but also will damage the Socceroos as people who last watched them saw Cahill or even Kewell. This is like a woman waiting all year for her prom and then wearing a potato sack This is nothing we havent had before and the game is still the same. With channel 10 announcing football will be number 1 like they did to the already popular cricket, expect our game to be a pawn in a dick measuring contest. If football doesnt have a plan to move past its current format with what it has been given, then this will be remembered in the same way as the channel 7 deal People see contra advertising as a negative.But why?We do have to spend for marketing.So why whinge that Ten are paying for this instead of APL or FA?…Contra money is money that would have to be spent…. I get the feeling people would jump up and down in joy if there was no contra,but cash instead.Thats nuts though,the money would then maybe never get spent on advertising or maybe there would be less because its after Tax money. This deal maybe another false dawn.But we can at least be optimistic for a while.Seriously what other options are there?If the ratings are abysmal and doom awaits,so be it.
|
|
|
bluebird2
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 648,
Visits: 0
|
+x+xHaving the Socceroos and Matildas on FTA will be a plus. I have seen excitement in my work place amongst non football fans when SBS started showing Socceroos games after the initial blackout from 2004 when pay got all the rights This isnt huge because its 10. This is huge because internationals need to be given the same access as other sports. Having only 1 or 2 games on the anti syphoning list is shit and I cant tell you how much it upsets me the WWC will be on Optus despite being on our fucking shores The points of interest of this are: . Still a lot of contra which is "being mentioned on project or master chef". No real cash and ambiguous value. Some people forget we have been on 10 before . The FFA had to buy the games from AFC (in past these were priced at $1m each) so that could be $6m to $10m a year in cash . The "face" value of the internationals ($100m for 3 years - if rights expire 2024) is greater than the entire A League at $200m for 5 years (this includes contra, broadcasting arrangements and other write offs). Dont expect interest in the Socceroos to translate to people watching WU v PG . The A League finally has the home it has been asking for, yet a mediocre AFL / NRL style uninspiring closed off league that not only ruins the image of the league, but also will damage the Socceroos as people who last watched them saw Cahill or even Kewell. This is like a woman waiting all year for her prom and then wearing a potato sack This is nothing we havent had before and the game is still the same. With channel 10 announcing football will be number 1 like they did to the already popular cricket, expect our game to be a pawn in a dick measuring contest. If football doesnt have a plan to move past its current format with what it has been given, then this will be remembered in the same way as the channel 7 deal People see contra advertising as a negative.But why?We do have to spend for marketing.So why whinge that Ten are paying for this instead of APL or FA?…Contra money is money that would have to be spent…. I get the feeling people would jump up and down in joy if there was no contra,but cash instead.Thats nuts though,the money would then maybe never get spent on advertising or maybe there would be less because its after Tax money. This deal maybe another false dawn.But we can at least be optimistic for a while.Seriously what other options are there?If the ratings are abysmal and doom awaits,so be it.
1/ People dont see contra as a negative. The issue with contra is it has no cash value to allow teams to spend more money or boost grassroots. When dissecting a TV deal it is important to know how much money is actually going into the game, vs how much is used to support the mechanics of the deal. A NSD is only possible with cash, not advertising. Any dismissal of contra is simply around discussions of what our game actually gets out of this deal 2/ To your last point, thats exactly right. Football is at a low point and things wont change until this situation improves. So where is the pathway out of here? On the surface of things people have bought into the mentality that we'll be on the only 3 stations people watch, we get BBL style interest, the game is number 1 in 3 years. Football doesnt need to be on one of 3 stations to grow. 15 years have been squandered as a result of failure to make use of the opportunities we had This deal is just smoke and mirrors. What I want to see is the plan, pathway and the substance. Anybody who thinks this couldnt be in place before a deal with one of 3 stations is kidding themselves
|
|
|
robbos
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 3.8K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+xHaving the Socceroos and Matildas on FTA will be a plus. I have seen excitement in my work place amongst non football fans when SBS started showing Socceroos games after the initial blackout from 2004 when pay got all the rights This isnt huge because its 10. This is huge because internationals need to be given the same access as other sports. Having only 1 or 2 games on the anti syphoning list is shit and I cant tell you how much it upsets me the WWC will be on Optus despite being on our fucking shores The points of interest of this are: . Still a lot of contra which is "being mentioned on project or master chef". No real cash and ambiguous value. Some people forget we have been on 10 before . The FFA had to buy the games from AFC (in past these were priced at $1m each) so that could be $6m to $10m a year in cash . The "face" value of the internationals ($100m for 3 years - if rights expire 2024) is greater than the entire A League at $200m for 5 years (this includes contra, broadcasting arrangements and other write offs). Dont expect interest in the Socceroos to translate to people watching WU v PG . The A League finally has the home it has been asking for, yet a mediocre AFL / NRL style uninspiring closed off league that not only ruins the image of the league, but also will damage the Socceroos as people who last watched them saw Cahill or even Kewell. This is like a woman waiting all year for her prom and then wearing a potato sack This is nothing we havent had before and the game is still the same. With channel 10 announcing football will be number 1 like they did to the already popular cricket, expect our game to be a pawn in a dick measuring contest. If football doesnt have a plan to move past its current format with what it has been given, then this will be remembered in the same way as the channel 7 deal People see contra advertising as a negative.But why?We do have to spend for marketing.So why whinge that Ten are paying for this instead of APL or FA?…Contra money is money that would have to be spent…. I get the feeling people would jump up and down in joy if there was no contra,but cash instead.Thats nuts though,the money would then maybe never get spent on advertising or maybe there would be less because its after Tax money. This deal maybe another false dawn.But we can at least be optimistic for a while.Seriously what other options are there?If the ratings are abysmal and doom awaits,so be it.
1/ People dont see contra as a negative. The issue with contra is it has no cash value to allow teams to spend more money or boost grassroots. When dissecting a TV deal it is important to know how much money is actually going into the game, vs how much is used to support the mechanics of the deal. A NSD is only possible with cash, not advertising. Any dismissal of contra is simply around discussions of what our game actually gets out of this deal 2/ To your last point, thats exactly right. Football is at a low point and things wont change until this situation improves. So where is the pathway out of here? On the surface of things people have bought into the mentality that we'll be on the only 3 stations people watch, we get BBL style interest, the game is number 1 in 3 years. Football doesnt need to be on one of 3 stations to grow. 15 years have been squandered as a result of failure to make use of the opportunities we had This deal is just smoke and mirrors. What I want to see is the plan, pathway and the substance. Anybody who thinks this couldnt be in place before a deal with one of 3 stations is kidding themselves Thankfully you are here to show us the light!!!!
|
|
|
Feed_The_Brox
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 3.3K,
Visits: 0
|
This is truly sensational news. a new era for football and we have a broadcast partner that will back the sport all the way. happy days. +xEvery Football fan should pay the 8.95 per month and get a Paramount stream... I wonder if Paramount will do a Football season pass? Or club members get a discount? $9 per month is pretty cheap anyway, but there will have to be more incentives to get people to sign up. This is not Kayo where you have the option of other sports... Although we do get other TV shows and movies. One concern is whether we can get Paramount into pubs so we can watch games. That might be problematic.
|
|
|
bettega
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 4.8K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+xHaving the Socceroos and Matildas on FTA will be a plus. I have seen excitement in my work place amongst non football fans when SBS started showing Socceroos games after the initial blackout from 2004 when pay got all the rights This isnt huge because its 10. This is huge because internationals need to be given the same access as other sports. Having only 1 or 2 games on the anti syphoning list is shit and I cant tell you how much it upsets me the WWC will be on Optus despite being on our fucking shores The points of interest of this are: . Still a lot of contra which is "being mentioned on project or master chef". No real cash and ambiguous value. Some people forget we have been on 10 before . The FFA had to buy the games from AFC (in past these were priced at $1m each) so that could be $6m to $10m a year in cash . The "face" value of the internationals ($100m for 3 years - if rights expire 2024) is greater than the entire A League at $200m for 5 years (this includes contra, broadcasting arrangements and other write offs). Dont expect interest in the Socceroos to translate to people watching WU v PG . The A League finally has the home it has been asking for, yet a mediocre AFL / NRL style uninspiring closed off league that not only ruins the image of the league, but also will damage the Socceroos as people who last watched them saw Cahill or even Kewell. This is like a woman waiting all year for her prom and then wearing a potato sack This is nothing we havent had before and the game is still the same. With channel 10 announcing football will be number 1 like they did to the already popular cricket, expect our game to be a pawn in a dick measuring contest. If football doesnt have a plan to move past its current format with what it has been given, then this will be remembered in the same way as the channel 7 deal People see contra advertising as a negative.But why?We do have to spend for marketing.So why whinge that Ten are paying for this instead of APL or FA?…Contra money is money that would have to be spent…. I get the feeling people would jump up and down in joy if there was no contra,but cash instead.Thats nuts though,the money would then maybe never get spent on advertising or maybe there would be less because its after Tax money. This deal maybe another false dawn.But we can at least be optimistic for a while.Seriously what other options are there?If the ratings are abysmal and doom awaits,so be it.
This deal is just smoke and mirrors. What I want to see is the plan, pathway and the substance. Anybody who thinks this couldnt be in place before a deal with one of 3 stations is kidding themselves There is a bit of truth in that statement, as always, all these deals have a degree of smoke and mirrors, that's now par for course. But there are a lot of good things in the overall deal: 1. all domestic and international football (relating to Australian interests) on the one platform/TV network 2. said TV network focusing almost entirely on football as their only sport 3. even if the $100 million is somewhat exaggerated by the FA, at the end of the day, there is definitely a greater net cash return than the previous arrangement - we don't know how much more, may never know how much more, but at a guess, the per annum jump would be something like $8 mill per annum to $15 mill per annum 4. we have two big years coming up: WC and WWC, and this whole package is perfectly timed to take advantage of the excitement to be generated over the next two years (hopefully less COVID affected) - so the big contra component probably does come at a good time On the flipside, you're partly right to put the spotlight on what is probably an exaggerated claim as to the worth of the deal, but overall, it does look like a positive step forward.
|
|
|
DandyCasey
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 321,
Visits: 0
|
Great deal, already unsubscribed from Kayo and went to the trouble of putting down incessant AFL adverts as the reason.
|
|
|
Footyball
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 3.8K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+xHaving the Socceroos and Matildas on FTA will be a plus. I have seen excitement in my work place amongst non football fans when SBS started showing Socceroos games after the initial blackout from 2004 when pay got all the rights This isnt huge because its 10. This is huge because internationals need to be given the same access as other sports. Having only 1 or 2 games on the anti syphoning list is shit and I cant tell you how much it upsets me the WWC will be on Optus despite being on our fucking shores The points of interest of this are: . Still a lot of contra which is "being mentioned on project or master chef". No real cash and ambiguous value. Some people forget we have been on 10 before . The FFA had to buy the games from AFC (in past these were priced at $1m each) so that could be $6m to $10m a year in cash . The "face" value of the internationals ($100m for 3 years - if rights expire 2024) is greater than the entire A League at $200m for 5 years (this includes contra, broadcasting arrangements and other write offs). Dont expect interest in the Socceroos to translate to people watching WU v PG . The A League finally has the home it has been asking for, yet a mediocre AFL / NRL style uninspiring closed off league that not only ruins the image of the league, but also will damage the Socceroos as people who last watched them saw Cahill or even Kewell. This is like a woman waiting all year for her prom and then wearing a potato sack This is nothing we havent had before and the game is still the same. With channel 10 announcing football will be number 1 like they did to the already popular cricket, expect our game to be a pawn in a dick measuring contest. If football doesnt have a plan to move past its current format with what it has been given, then this will be remembered in the same way as the channel 7 deal People see contra advertising as a negative.But why?We do have to spend for marketing.So why whinge that Ten are paying for this instead of APL or FA?…Contra money is money that would have to be spent…. I get the feeling people would jump up and down in joy if there was no contra,but cash instead.Thats nuts though,the money would then maybe never get spent on advertising or maybe there would be less because its after Tax money. This deal maybe another false dawn.But we can at least be optimistic for a while.Seriously what other options are there?If the ratings are abysmal and doom awaits,so be it.
This deal is just smoke and mirrors. What I want to see is the plan, pathway and the substance. Anybody who thinks this couldnt be in place before a deal with one of 3 stations is kidding themselves There is a bit of truth in that statement, as always, all these deals have a degree of smoke and mirrors, that's now par for course. But there are a lot of good things in the overall deal: 1. all domestic and international football (relating to Australian interests) on the one platform/TV network 2. said TV network focusing almost entirely on football as their only sport 3. even if the $100 million is somewhat exaggerated by the FA, at the end of the day, there is definitely a greater net cash return than the previous arrangement - we don't know how much more, may never know how much more, but at a guess, the per annum jump would be something like $8 mill per annum to $15 mill per annum 4. we have two big years coming up: WC and WWC, and this whole package is perfectly timed to take advantage of the excitement to be generated over the next two years (hopefully less COVID affected) - so the big contra component probably does come at a good time On the flipside, you're partly right to put the spotlight on what is probably an exaggerated claim as to the worth of the deal, but overall, it does look like a positive step forward. That's alot of baffling with bullshit boys, considering you don't sit in with negotiations.
|
|
|
sydneyfc1987
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 10K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+xReally astonishing that you've still managed to be negative about this deal, which is an unmitigated positive. I'm not being negative, just realistic. I cant tell you how many times our game has been in this position starting with channel 7 at the end of the 90s Out of interest how much was the 7 deal?
(VAR) IS NAVY BLUE
|
|
|
bluebird2
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 648,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+xReally astonishing that you've still managed to be negative about this deal, which is an unmitigated positive. I'm not being negative, just realistic. I cant tell you how many times our game has been in this position starting with channel 7 at the end of the 90s Out of interest how much was the 7 deal? The 7 deal was $1m for 7 years (IIRC) which was more money than the code had seen. Major network, major backing, and was deemed to be the savior for the code If your point is that this is bigger than our deal more than 20 years ago when the league was semi pro, mismanaged and struggling, it is worth pointing out the current deal is no real different to what we had 8 years ago This deal seems to come down to whether channel 10 can do for our game what it "did" for the already popular BBL. The good thing is we dont have to spend much time arguing preemptively about it. In a few short months we'll know for sure
|
|
|
southmelb
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 5.8K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+xReally astonishing that you've still managed to be negative about this deal, which is an unmitigated positive. I'm not being negative, just realistic. I cant tell you how many times our game has been in this position starting with channel 7 at the end of the 90s Out of interest how much was the 7 deal? The 7 deal was $1m for 7 years (IIRC) which was more money than the code had seen. Major network, major backing, and was deemed to be the savior for the code If your point is that this is bigger than our deal more than 20 years ago when the league was semi pro, mismanaged and struggling, it is worth pointing out the current deal is no real different to what we had 8 years ago This deal seems to come down to whether channel 10 can do for our game what it "did" for the already popular BBL. The good thing is we dont have to spend much time arguing preemptively about it. In a few short months we'll know for sure I feel like 10 turned the bbl into a success, but they also covered every game, every night, they also had it when the novelty factor was huge in its early days, similar to fox with the A league 15 years ago. Eye balls with paramount will be the key, will you be able to watch it at the pub?
|
|
|
bluebird2
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 648,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+xReally astonishing that you've still managed to be negative about this deal, which is an unmitigated positive. I'm not being negative, just realistic. I cant tell you how many times our game has been in this position starting with channel 7 at the end of the 90s Out of interest how much was the 7 deal? The 7 deal was $1m for 7 years (IIRC) which was more money than the code had seen. Major network, major backing, and was deemed to be the savior for the code If your point is that this is bigger than our deal more than 20 years ago when the league was semi pro, mismanaged and struggling, it is worth pointing out the current deal is no real different to what we had 8 years ago This deal seems to come down to whether channel 10 can do for our game what it "did" for the already popular BBL. The good thing is we dont have to spend much time arguing preemptively about it. In a few short months we'll know for sure I feel like 10 turned the bbl into a success, but they also covered every game, every night, they also had it when the novelty factor was huge in its early days, similar to fox with the A league 15 years ago. Eye balls with paramount will be the key, will you be able to watch it at the pub? Yes and no The BBL was the highest rating sport on Pay but no FTA coverage. This means no interest from 70% of the sports market because they couldnt become a casual fan of a gimmick league that they couldnt watch What FTA did was bring the game to those who couldnt watch it. We saw the same when SBS showed the A League (ratings were higher on FTA) but a lower ratio. Football fans could only watch the game on Pay so more football fans had pay as a result. Cricket fans could watch the game free so they didnt watch pay exclusive content We have already had our FTA hit. Football fans simply argued with the numbers because they were expecting 4 times the numbers instead of the double we got As for watching Paramount at the pub, that will be a problem. Football as an exclusive payTV product grew in pubs. Thats part of the social fabric of our game. Now we are down to 1 game a week in pubs and venues unless they want to start streaming Internet content. I assume there are tougher legalities around this as rights for music and TV content are different to rights for broadcasting sport in public
|
|
|
Burztur
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 9.1K,
Visits: 0
|
+xThis is truly sensational news. a new era for football and we have a broadcast partner that will back the sport all the way. happy days. +xEvery Football fan should pay the 8.95 per month and get a Paramount stream... I wonder if Paramount will do a Football season pass? Or club members get a discount? $9 per month is pretty cheap anyway, but there will have to be more incentives to get people to sign up. This is not Kayo where you have the option of other sports... Although we do get other TV shows and movies. One concern is whether we can get Paramount into pubs so we can watch games. That might be problematic. In the announcement, they did say HAL clubs were trying to bundle memberships with discounted Paramount+ subscriptions. Nothing official yet but it would be nice. Paramount+ is trying to drive up numbers, so I can see a small discount (or packaging) happening.
|
|
|
Midfielder
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 4.7K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+xReally astonishing that you've still managed to be negative about this deal, which is an unmitigated positive. I'm not being negative, just realistic. I cant tell you how many times our game has been in this position starting with channel 7 at the end of the 90s If you guys want to be overly optimistic and celebratory, thats fine. But as this unfolds over the next few months I hope you guys are prepared for a realistic and detailed analysis. Not simply call it as a success regardless of what happens, as I have seen on this forum in the past Way way to hard, First channel 7 paid 1 million with revenues at the time of close to 700 million.... Ten are paying 70 million with revenues of around 600 million I think, its very different ... Seven brought Football to bury it for the AFL re the email.. TEN wanta make Football grow ... polar opposites in corporate objectives.. Second, if you read the TEN release and you should... TEN have said Football needs to grow and is in a bad place and it will take over seven yes 7 years.... meaning TEN have a long term plan and seem prepared to invest and wait. On this point CBS are massively invested in Football in the US....meaning they understand how to work with little other media and are hugely invested into Football see their web page... https://www.cbssports.com/soccer/Football in general has only rarely had good admins and sometimes the good ones stayed to long..... Frank Lowy is the most obvious three attempts .... the A-League worked especially in years 1 thu to say 3.... at this point a plan should have ... Both Danny Townsend [APL media negotiator] & JJ, openly said they want a broadcast partner to help grow the game not simply a broadcaster... This is an amazing deal if you consider were we are and the like of which Football has never had before... Seven need to make the AFL work, Nine need to make League work, and now TEN need to make Football work.... Yes we still have the same problems as before, but hand on heart not the other thing, things under JJ are changing.... to slow for some but change is happening.... As an aside Nine, Seven, ABC have many on air people who follow other sporting codes, TEN has six on air people who are know as Football fans and only SBS had this before... these are... Waleed Aly, Peter van Onselen, Ed Kavalee Sam Pang, Miguel Maestre, Jock Zonfrillo
|
|
|
SUTHERLANDBEAR
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 3.3K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+xReally astonishing that you've still managed to be negative about this deal, which is an unmitigated positive. I'm not being negative, just realistic. I cant tell you how many times our game has been in this position starting with channel 7 at the end of the 90s If you guys want to be overly optimistic and celebratory, thats fine. But as this unfolds over the next few months I hope you guys are prepared for a realistic and detailed analysis. Not simply call it as a success regardless of what happens, as I have seen on this forum in the past Way way to hard, First channel 7 paid 1 million with revenues at the time of close to 700 million.... Ten are paying 70 million with revenues of around 600 million I think, its very different ... Seven brought Football to bury it for the AFL re the email.. TEN wanta make Football grow ... polar opposites in corporate objectives.. Second, if you read the TEN release and you should... TEN have said Football needs to grow and is in a bad place and it will take over seven yes 7 years.... meaning TEN have a long term plan and seem prepared to invest and wait. On this point CBS are massively invested in Football in the US....meaning they understand how to work with little other media and are hugely invested into Football see their web page... https://www.cbssports.com/soccer/Football in general has only rarely had good admins and sometimes the good ones stayed to long..... Frank Lowy is the most obvious three attempts .... the A-League worked especially in years 1 thu to say 3.... at this point a plan should have ... Both Danny Townsend [APL media negotiator] & JJ, openly said they want a broadcast partner to help grow the game not simply a broadcaster... This is an amazing deal if you consider were we are and the like of which Football has never had before... Seven need to make the AFL work, Nine need to make League work, and now TEN need to make Football work.... Yes we still have the same problems as before, but hand on heart not the other thing, things under JJ are changing.... to slow for some but change is happening.... John O'Neill if he stayed would have grown the A league to way above where it is now. A big loss.
|
|
|
Midfielder
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 4.7K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+xReally astonishing that you've still managed to be negative about this deal, which is an unmitigated positive. I'm not being negative, just realistic. I cant tell you how many times our game has been in this position starting with channel 7 at the end of the 90s If you guys want to be overly optimistic and celebratory, thats fine. But as this unfolds over the next few months I hope you guys are prepared for a realistic and detailed analysis. Not simply call it as a success regardless of what happens, as I have seen on this forum in the past Way way to hard, First channel 7 paid 1 million with revenues at the time of close to 700 million.... Ten are paying 70 million with revenues of around 600 million I think, its very different ... Seven brought Football to bury it for the AFL re the email.. TEN wanta make Football grow ... polar opposites in corporate objectives.. Second, if you read the TEN release and you should... TEN have said Football needs to grow and is in a bad place and it will take over seven yes 7 years.... meaning TEN have a long term plan and seem prepared to invest and wait. On this point CBS are massively invested in Football in the US....meaning they understand how to work with little other media and are hugely invested into Football see their web page... https://www.cbssports.com/soccer/Football in general has only rarely had good admins and sometimes the good ones stayed to long..... Frank Lowy is the most obvious three attempts .... the A-League worked especially in years 1 thu to say 3.... at this point a plan should have ... Both Danny Townsend [APL media negotiator] & JJ, openly said they want a broadcast partner to help grow the game not simply a broadcaster... This is an amazing deal if you consider were we are and the like of which Football has never had before... Seven need to make the AFL work, Nine need to make League work, and now TEN need to make Football work.... Yes we still have the same problems as before, but hand on heart not the other thing, things under JJ are changing.... to slow for some but change is happening.... John O'Neill if he stayed would have grown the A league to way above where it is now. A big loss. Agree and he decided in season 1 that his structure of one team per capital city was wrong and wanted new teams in both Sydney & Melbourne... Lowy said no and he left over it.... something by the way hardly ever reported on SBS but they constantly point out his One team per capital city was wrong... but never he also said that and tried to change it...
|
|
|
bluebird2
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 648,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+xReally astonishing that you've still managed to be negative about this deal, which is an unmitigated positive. I'm not being negative, just realistic. I cant tell you how many times our game has been in this position starting with channel 7 at the end of the 90s If you guys want to be overly optimistic and celebratory, thats fine. But as this unfolds over the next few months I hope you guys are prepared for a realistic and detailed analysis. Not simply call it as a success regardless of what happens, as I have seen on this forum in the past Way way to hard, First channel 7 paid 1 million with revenues at the time of close to 700 million.... Ten are paying 70 million with revenues of around 600 million I think, its very different ... Seven brought Football to bury it for the AFL re the email.. TEN wanta make Football grow ... polar opposites in corporate objectives.. You are missing a few steps I dont recall the first Foxtel deal but the second one a year later was $120m for 7 years. This represented a 120 times increase on the previous deal The second deal was $40m per year instead of $17m which was a 2 and a bit increase The third deal was $40m for A League and Socceroos friendlies only. The key Socceroos games were purchased from Fox separately, and the FFA would have been given (IIRC) $1m per game. Say $10m per year The current deal, for all intends and purposes, is the same for the A League. For the Socceroos it is $30m less the "$10m" the FFA would have gotten from Asia, less also the amount they paid for it. If you say this is $15m then its $15m vs $10m which is still splitting hairs There is no sense comparing this deal to our worth 3 deals ago and saying there was a radical increase that has been given to us by channel 10. This is essentially the same A League deal with a slightly bigger push for Socceroos content. I get you are passionate about what 10 can do for the game (that they didnt want to do 2 years ago) but Foxtel and SBS have been major long term partners that have given use the same money and done wonders for the game. They only started biting back when we did This is not a magical miraculous ground breaking deal. People 15 years ago wanted to be on one of three networks and thats what they now have. We'll see the impact soon enough
|
|
|
The_Wookie
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 346,
Visits: 0
|
+xHas there been any mention of ACL? Not specificed. Under this landmark agreement, 10 ViacomCBS will broadcast the below content across Network 10 and Paramount+: - Matildas Friendly Internationals (home and away)
- Socceroos Friendly Internationals (home and away)
- U23 Men’s Friendly Internationals (home)
- Socceroos’ 2026 FIFA World Cup Asian Qualifier Round 2 matches (home)
- Other Football Australia controlled Youth National Teams matches (home)
- FIFA World Cup Qatar 2022 Asian Qualifiers – Round Three (including prospective Play-Off matches)
- AFC Asian Cup China 2023TM Finals
- AFC Women’s Asian Cup India 2022TM Finals
- AFC U23 Asian Cup Finals 2022, 2024
- AFC Women’s Olympic Qualifying Tournament (Final Round) for Paris Olympics 2024
- AFC U20 Asian Cup Finals 2023
- AFC U17 Asian Cup Finals 2023
- AFC U20 Women’s Asian Cup Finals 2022 and 2024
- AFC U17 Women’s Asian Cup Finals 2022 and 2024
- AFC Futsal Asian Cup Finals 2022, 2024
- AFC Solidarity Cup 2024
- A-League Club Play-Off matches to enter FFA Cup Round of 32
- All FFA Cup matches played from Round of 32 onwards, including the Round of 16, Quarter Finals, Semi-Finals and the FFA Cup Final
- All non-Australian matches across AFC competitions, including Round 3 FIFA World Cup Qualifying matches and AFC Asian Cup matches
|
|
|